Whittaker v. Owens, No. 4:2021cv00549 - Document 43 (E.D. Mo. 2022)

Court Description: OPINION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (See Full Order) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for copies of documents [ECF No. 4 2] is DENIED. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 7/14/2022. (JEB)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION ROBERT L. WHITTAKER, Plaintiff, v. DALE GLASS, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 4:21-CV-549 SRW OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s motion for copies of documents filed in this action.1 Plaintiff seeks: A copy of any and all filed petitions, motions, requests and court rulings and orders related thereto as the date(s) are from 3/3/2022 through 6/22/2022 which this record is important to my motion and appeal. Plaintiff was provided one file-stamped copy of each of the Court’s Orders, at the time each Order was entered. The Court does not provide a second set of documents for free. The Clerk’s Office will make copies of documents filed in this action at the rate of fifty cents ($.50) per page, prepaid. Furthermore, it was plaintiff’s responsibility to have kept a copy of each of his own documents that he filed with the Court. The Court is not responsible for providing a copy of those filings for plaintiff, for free. If plaintiff wished to have a file-stamp copy of his pleadings and motions, he was responsible for sending two copies of each of his pleadings and/or motions to the Court, along with a self-addressed stamped envelope. This would have allowed the Clerk to return a file-stamped copy of each document to plaintiff. 1 Plaintiff paid the full filing fee in this action and is not proceeding in forma pauperis, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, as he has accumulated three strikes pursuant to § 1915(g). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for copies of documents [ECF No. 42] is DENIED. Dated this 14th day of July, 2022. HENRY EDWARD AUTREY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.